Interest in Africa is booming. “Outsiders have noticed that the continent is important and becoming more so, not least because of its growing share of the global population (by 2025 the UN predicts that there will be more Africans than Chinese people). Governments and businesses from all around the world are rushing to strengthen diplomatic, strategic and commercial ties. This creates vast opportunities. If Africa handles the new scramble wisely, the main winners will be Africans themselves.”

Brexit is “akin to attempting to remove an egg from an omelette” and if there’s not a deal, it’s likely to become an even bigger mess. “Today’s “no deal” papers reveal the complicated exercise could carry significant costs for consumers and businesses if Britain and the EU fail to agree on a transition period and a subsequent trading agreement.” Failure to reach a deal would “very likely to have a negative impact on the economy and could mean higher prices in the shops as firms pass on the higher costs of doing business.”

“The Fed has been able to slowly and predictably raise interest rates this year because the economy has performed largely in line with its expectations, but Wednesday’s minutes show how trade uncertainties loom large for U.S. businesses and Fed officials.”

“Trump is waging a trade war in the dumbest way possible.” In the best of times, “trade wars are neither good nor easy to win…. Every side loses, experiencing lost jobs, crippled businesses and higher prices for consumers.” Trumps tariffs are now estimated to result in 16 lost U.S. jobs for every job gained in the aluminum/steel industry: a painful, self-inflicted wound. Moreover, the counterpunches of our trading partners “are likely to draw more blood.” With the “already announced $40 billion worth of retaliatory tariffs on U.S.-made products,” Canada, the EU, Mexico, Russia, India, Japan and Turkey have “fine-tuned the art of minimizing their own pain — and maximizing ours.”

“Farmers, electronics retailers and other U.S. businesses are bracing for a backlash as President Donald Trump targets China for stealing American technology or pressuring U.S. companies to hand it over.”0

President Trump is now talking about “a ‘massive tax cut’ for businesses and individuals.” He even said it would likely be “bigger” than “any tax cut ever.” Simplistic boasts may be exciting, but they are dangerous. “Here’s the thing: Trump, who used the word ‘massive’ 12 times in that AP interview, forgot to mention a huuuuge caveat about tax reform efforts: They are devilishly difficult to pull off. Cutting taxes without adding trillions to the federal debt is especially hard to do.”

The approach insurgent companies are taking will survive long after some of them have failed. They are providing a striking addition to the capitalist toolbox. Airbnb and Uber and the rest…. are pioneering a new sort of company that can do a better job of turning dreams into businesses.”

“In a welcome development, businesses are asking world leaders to do more to address climate change. This week, the top executives of six large European oil and gas companies called for a tax on carbon emissions.” Implementation will face stiff resistance, but “world leaders, who will meet in Paris later this year to negotiate a climate change agreement, cannot give up in the face of this opposition. Carbon taxes are one of the best policies available to solve this global problem.”

A recent study from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) “confirms that the investment bust is a global phenomenon. It’s not just the United States but also Europe, Japan and most advanced countries. As important, the main cause of the investment slump is clear-cut: Businesses aren’t expanding because they can already meet most demand with existing capacity.”

“U.S. businesses are aging…and a sharp decline in start-up companies is a big reason. As the share of young firms shrinks, the surviving companies are naturally older — and this may have huge ramifications for the economy.” Nobody’s sure why this trend is occurring, but it suggests slower job creation and raises a troubling question. “Could it be that a society whose members are getting older is more risk-averse and less adventurous?”